2 Parralel Sliding Rotors Leap Frogging Around the Stator Magnets

[gravityblock]

Video Update:  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7BszZwjpUyA

The bottom rotor easily gets past the sticky spot going Counter Clockwise and the top rotor easily gets past the sticky spot going Clockwise.  If I can get both rotors to have no sticky spot when both are moving in the same direction, then I believe it will work in a closed loop.  Having a sticky spot in one direction and no sticky spot in another direction is proof of an asymmetric system which leads to a gain in one direction and a loss in the other direction.  I have listed below some possible solutions to have both rotors have no sticky spot when moving in the same direction. 

I think this issue can be solved when the top and bottom rotor magnets are facing the stator magnets with opposite polarities and there is more distance between the top and bottom rotor magnets.  In addition to this, the magnets need to be fairly equal in strength for the best chance of closing the loop.

@Rapadura:  This may be the reason why ClanZer wasn't able to close the loop with the offset magnet (Because one rotor magnet would have no sticky spot in a particular direction while the other rotor magnet would have a sticky spot for that same direction).  This is my best guess at the moment, and only ClanZer knows why the loop wasn't closed.  This is the reason why our successes along with our failures need to be documented.

I have a really good feel to what is going on in this system and I will be analyzing everything in order to overcome any issues.  It's a tedious and time consuming process, but I think there is something to be learned from this concept and in the end it may even work.

GB

[Rapadura]

The sticky spot being stronger in one direction than in the other direction is something that deserves to be carefully analised in the real world, in practice...

It opens a lot of possibilities...

[gravityblock]

I'm going to add 2 more stators (I need to buy more magnets for these additional stators and should be able to pick up the necessary magnets today).  This will give me a total of 4 stators with 3 magnets on each rotor.  There will always be a stator magnet pulling a rotor magnet from the sticky spot.  I increased the distance between the top and bottom rotor magnets so they do not interact and work against each other.

I'll post a video update after I add the additional stators to the system.

GB

[gravityblock]

Using two harmonic drive systems, one for each rotor, should allow both rotors to leap frog around the dynamic stator magnets in order to be self-sustaining.  Here's an excellent video demonstrating how the harmonic drives work, http://www.harmonicdrive.de/german/funktionsprinzip/funktionsprinzip-film.html

There are 3 parts to the harmonic drives.  A circular spline which is fixed, a flex spline attached to an output shaft, and a wave generator attached to the input shaft.  Each rotor will be mounted to their respective wave generator for the input shaft.  A dynamic stator magnet will be mounted to the output shaft for both harmonic drives.

The key to the design of the harmonic drive is that there are fewer teeth (for example 2, 4, 6, etc. fewer) on the flex spline than there are on the circular spline. This means that for every full rotation of the wave generator, the flex spline would be required to rotate a slight amount (2, 4, or 6 teeth depending on the difference in the number of teeth between the flex spline and circular spline) backward relative to the circular spline. Thus the rotation action of the wave generator results in a much slower rotation of the flex spline in the opposite direction.

Since the stator magnets slightly rotate in the opposite direction on a complete rotation, this allows for great precision and allows each stator magnet to be at a slight offset so it can free both rotors at the appropriate time in order for this system to work.  In the previous design, it was impossible to have both stators to be at an offset for each rotor.

Here's a video of a high speed robot hand using the harmonic drive, http://www.ebaumsworld.com/video/watch/80731612   Wiki has a good reference for the harmonic drives, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harmonic_drive

I feel really good and excited about this.  I think this will solve the issues I have had with the previous design.  The same basic principal remains the same though.  This new design is using a dynamic stator instead of a conventional stationary stator, (this is the only difference between the two designs).  I do realize the term "dynamic stator" is a contradiction to each other, but this contradictory term will help to differentiate the different aspects of the device.  I've put a lot of thought and experimentation into this concept.

[Edit:]  Additional information on the harmonic drive, http://www.waltmusser.org/HD.htm

Thanks,

GB

[Low-Q]

The sticky spot being stronger in one direction than in the other direction is something that deserves to be carefully analised in the real world, in practice...

It opens a lot of possibilities...

Only if the physics follows the idea. Most of the time an idea do not follow the exact physics - not even this time I think.
The sticky spot that is weaker in one direction I believe is only random. It could likely be the opposite way. It seems to me that the two rotors are repelling eachother. When those rotor magnets are ligned up, the sum of attraction and repel of the statormagnet is zero. But it takes energy to force those rotor magnets together. If the timing is perfect, these rotors will spin just like an ordinary wheel and stop because of friction.

If those two rotors does not work separately, it would not work when combined - the demonstration also prooves that quite clear. Unless one of the magnets demagnetize, there are no change in the magnetic properties when two magnets are combined like in this demonstration.

My thoughts anyways.

Br.

Vidar